Reasonable and Prudent Alternative in the Delta Smelt Biological Opinion

1. Reasonable and Prudent Alternative in the Delta Smelt Biological Opinion

2. Service’s 2008 Biological Opinion BO covered long-term operations of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project BO found that Projects resulted in jeopardy to delta smelt and adverse modification of delta smelt critical habitat

3. Service’s 2008 Biological Opinion Jeopardy and Adverse Modification Based on: Changed Project Description Adverse Effects to delta smelt and critical habitat Low numbers of delta smelt BO includes Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA) to remove jeopardy and adverse modification

4. RPA Components RPA Goal-keep delta smelt away from the influence of the pumps and in suitable habitat Component 1 – Protection of the Adult Delta Smelt Life Stage Component 2 – Protection of Larval and Juvenile Delta Smelt Component 3 – Improve Habitat for Delta Smelt Growth and Rearing Component 4 – Habitat Restoration Component 5 – Monitoring and Reporting

5. Component 1 - Adults Control Old and Middle River flows (OMR) to protect prespawning adults from Dec-Mar Protect upmigrating delta smelt (Action 1) Once turbidity or salvage trigger has been met, -2,000 cfs OMR for 14 days to reduce flows towards the pumps Was not implemented in WY 2009 Protect delta smelt after migration prior to spawning (Action 2) OMR range between -1,250 and -5,000 cfs determined using adaptive process until spawning detected

6. Component 2 – Larval/Juveniles Improve flow conditions to allow larval and juvenile delta smelt to rear in the Delta and ultimately migrate downstream Action starts once temperatures hit 12 degrees Celsius at three delta monitoring stations or when spent female is caught OMR range between -1,250 and -5,000 cfs determined using adaptive process OMR flows continue until June 30th or when Delta water temperatures reach 25 degrees Celsius, whichever comes first

7. Adaptive Process for Components 1 and 2 Smelt Working Group (SWG) (Service, CDFG, Reclamation, EPA and DWR biologists and Project Operators) use all available information, including real time information to provide recommendations SWG makes weekly recommendation on action needed to protect delta smelt to the Service Includes flow, temperature, salinity, turbidity data Results of delta smelt distribution survey Particle tracking model results Counts of delta smelt entrained at the export facilities

8. Component 3 – Improve Growing and Rearing Habitat Increase fall habitat quality and quantity only during above normal and wet years Additional increment of Delta outflow in September, October, and November Monthly X2 downstream of 74 km in Wet WYs Monthly X2 downstream of 81 km in Above Normal WYs Includes a formal adaptive management process Includes Habitat Study Group (HSG) to monitor action and review new scientific information

9. Component 4-Habitat Restoration Provide benefits to delta smelt habitat to supplement the benefits resulting from the flow actions Requires DWR to create or restore 8,000 acres of intertidal and subtidal habitat for delta smelt Component 5-Monitoring and Reporting • Requires monitoring efforts in the Delta to continue as well as reporting requirements

10. Technical Review of the Delta Smelt Biological Opinion

11. Interagency Technical Team Included delta smelt experts from the Service, California Department of Fish and Game, EPA, Reclamation and other academics Team provided scientific and technical expertise in the review of the Biological Assessment and the development of the BO

12. Internal Peer Review of the Draft Biological Opinion Included experts on Section 7 and experience with complex consultations Included Service biologists with knowledge on Delta issues Provided comments throughout the process

13. External Peer Review of the Administrative Draft Effects Analysis Reviewed Administrative Draft of Effects Section of BO Panel Members: Dr. Kenneth Rose, Louisiana State University Dr. WimKimmerer, San Francisco State University Mr. G. Roy Leidy, PBS&J Mr. John Durand, University of California, Davis

14. Key Findings of the Panel Agreed with analytical approach on how operations affect delta smelt Found that Information and literature used was up to date and used the best available science Found that inclusion of climate change significantly strengthens analysis Additional comments: The Admin Draft effects analysis lacked sufficient organization, clarity, completeness Questioned the accuracy of Pseudodiaptomus forbesi analysis Suggested using residence time as metric for possible impacts to phytoplankton biomass

15. Peer Review of the Service’s Actions and DWR Actions Review consisted of review of draft Actions from the Service as well as proposed actions by DWR to protect delta smelt Panel Members: Dr. Kenneth Rose, Louisiana State University Dr. WimKimmerer, San Francisco State University Mr. G. Roy Leidy, PBS&J Dr. William Bennett, University of California, Davis

16. Key Findings of the Panel for the Service’s Admin Draft Actions Actions reflected a great deal of thought and examination of data and available information Actions appeared “implementable and practical” Reliance on OMR in Actions 1-3 is sound Panel endorsed idea of considering both mortality (Actions 1-3) and habitat (Action 4) Use of near real-time data from multiple sources along with PTM results innovative

17. Outcomes of the Technical Reviews Service revised draft and final biological opinion based on these reviews Service reviewed and incorporated, where appropriate, comments from the review panels as well as from Reclamation and other agencies.

18. Information Quality Act Review of Biological Opinion Review conducted in response to IQA request by the Family Farm Alliance Panel Members: Dr. William V. Sobczak, College of the Holy Cross Dr. Ronald T. Kneib, University of Georgia Marine Institute Dr. Ronald M. Thom, Marine Sciences Laboratory, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Dr. David G. Hankin, Humboldt State University, Dr. John (Jack) H. Humphrey, P.E., Hydmet, Inc.

19. Key Findings Agreed that entrainment related mortality may account for a substantial proportion of the population in some years, and have an important ‘sporadic’ effect on delta smelt abundance Project pumping is the primary force acting on delta hydrodynamics It is reasonable to conclude that project operations increase the effects of other stressors on delta smelt The use of linear or non-linear model for OMR to salvage relationship would have made little difference, and the linear model used in the BO was more conservative (predicted less entrainment mortality) Service did credibly employ Rose (2000) by using a multidisciplinary team and by using model results

20. Key Findings Continued • Use of the X2 index in the BO highly defensible and consistent with best available scientific and commercial data • Strongly concurred with use of X2 as an index of delta smelt abiotic habitat • Supported the use of modeled versus historic hydrologic data in the BO • Confirmed a reduction in total Delta outflow during all WY types compared to unimpaired conditions • Strongly supported premise that actions impairing Pseudodiaptomus forbesi population are highly likely to negatively impact delta smelt population